About Me

Dr. Clyde Winters, has taught in the Chicago Public Schools for 36 years. He has taught Education and Linguistic Courses at Saint Xavier University-Chicago. As a teacher in the Chicago Public Schools Dr. Winters wrote State Standards in the 1990's for the Chicago Public School system and Common Core State Standards for Social Studies. He also wrote the 6th Grade World History Lesson Plans used in the CPS in 2000.

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

In the latest article by Pontus Skoglund, and David Reich.
(2016).A genomic view of the peopling of the Americas, the authors claim that the Solutrean
hypothesis should be rejected because the Anzick child carried mtDNA D4, which
is also carried by the Australo-Melanesians. This hypothesis is groundless
because some of the Australo-Melanesians, especially the Fijians, claim they came from Tanzania, where , some
people carry mtDNA M1, which Gonder
claims cluster with peoples from Oceania.

Skoglund and Reich (2016), argue that the earliest
Native Americans crossed the Beringa into North America, and that this Beringian
population is related more to South American Indians, instead of North American
Indians[i].
They argue that this population 12,600 years ago, as represented by the ‘Anzick
child of Montana was related to the Mal’ta population. Anzick child carried mtDNA
D4h3a, and Y-chromosome Q-L54*(xM3) .

In the picture above we see in the middle a reconstruction of the first Europeans, as represented by Mal'ta man. On the left we see Naia of ancient Mexico and to the left of the first European we see Luzia, of Brazil. Luzia and Naia are aleoamericans. Anzick child would have resembled these Blacks.

It is interesting that Anzick-1 was found in 1968. The
Anzick-1 remains were returned to the Anzick family and analyzed by Sarah
Anzick who discovered that the skeleton carried mtDNA D4h3a, which is also
carried by Native Americans on the West Coast, of North America[ii].
Skoglund and Reich (2016) wrote:

“The most surprising finding was that the Anzick individual
is from a population more closely related to Central- and South Americans than
to some northern North Americans (including all speakers of Algonquian
languages studied to date), despite the apparent common ancestral origin of
Native Americans across the continents. This suggests that the present-day
population structure of the main ancestry in Native Americans [23] dates back
to more than 12,600 years ago [25], and that this diversification divided the
ancestry of present-day Native Americans into two main streams, one of which
includes the ancestors of present-day Northern Native Americans analyzed
(‘NNA’: Cree, Ojibwa, and Algonquin), and the other of which includes the
Anzick individual and present-day Central- and South American groups (‘SA’:
e.g. Mixe, Quechua, and Yaghan).”

It is surprising that
given the fact that the Anzick skeleton was in the possession of Sarah Anzick
who is a genomic research her that no one has questioned the results of Sarah
Anzick. Since the Anzick skeleton’s DNA could have been contaminated while under
the protection of the Anzick family, these results may not reflect the true
ancestry of Anzick.

Skoglund and Reich (2016), argue that since the Andamanese
and Australo-Melanesians carry D4h3a, this haplogroup had to have entered
America via the Beringa around 12,000 BC. The presence of this haplogroup among
the Australo-Melanesians is not supported by archaeological evidence.

The Fijians, for example claim they came from Tanzania. The
archaeological evidence indicate that the Melanesians recently entered
Melanesia from Africa. And that the Melanesian languages have an African
substratum and the place-names are identical to West African placenames[iii].

The archaeological evidence indicate that the Melenesians
only arrived in their present habitation areas during the Lapita cultural
expansion 3-4kya. As a result, the Australo-Melanesians were not in Eurasia 12kya,
as assumed by Skoglund and Reich (2016).

Haplotypes with HVSI transitions defining 16129-16223-16249-16278-16311-16362;
and 16129-16223- 16234-16249-16211-16362 have been found in Thailand and among
the Han Chinese (Fucharon et al., 2001)[iv],
these haplotypes were originally thought to be members of Haplogroup M1.
However, on the basis of currently available FGS sequences, carriers of these
markers have been found to be in the D4a branch of Haplogroup D, the most
widespread branch of M1 in East Asia (Fucharon et al., 2001; Gondor et al.,
2006; Yao et al., 2002)[v].
The transitions 16129, 16189, 16249 and 16311 are known to be recurrent in
various branches of Haplogroup M, especially M1 and D4. Gonder et al., (2006)
for example, noted that the mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1
cluster with peoples from Oceania[vi].

Given the fact that the Melanesians recently entered the
Pacific from Africa they can not be the source of the Paleoamerican population
that carried mtDNA D4 to the Anzick
child. The fact that the Anzick child carrid DNA related to Mal’ta man, who
lived in Europe, supports the Solutrean hypothesis for some of the
Paleoamericans[vii].
Since the Solutrean culture originated in Africa and was later taken to Europe
it would explain the affinity between mtDNA D4a and the M1 carried by the Tanzanians who are the
ancestors of the Fijians.

This paper attempts to address the issue of the OoA event using contemporary Egyptian DNA. The results are useless.The fact that contemporary Egyptians are of predominant Arabian and Caucasian origin reflects the replacement of the ancient Egyptians over the past 1500 years.

There are many ancient mummies. if the authors would have attempted to recover ancient DNA we

might have gained insight into the OoA event, but since the ancient Egyptians have been replaced , a contemporary Egyptian population can not tell us anything about ancient Egyptians DNA and the role ancient Egyptians played in the OoA event.

This paper attempts to address the issue of the OoA event using contemporary Egyptian DNA. The results are useless.The fact that contemporary Egyptians are of predominant Arabian and Caucasian origin reflects the replacement of the ancient Egyptians over the past 1500 years.

There are many ancient mummies. if the authors would have attempted to recover ancient DNA we

might have gained insight into the OoA event, but since the ancient Egyptians have been replaced , a contemporary Egyptian population can not tell us anything about ancient Egyptians DNA and the role ancient Egyptians played in the OoA event.